Nabb1:nekom: Helping out a person who happens to be an atheist? Fantastic.Helping out a person BECAUSE she's an atheist? Well, it's still helping, but it's a pretty dick motivation.

Kind of agree. I don't know if that was the intent, but it kind of smacks of some backdoor prejudices.

I donated not because she was an atheist, but because she came out of the closet as an atheist in an area where this could get her ostracized or even harmed. By good, charitable Christian folk. That kind of courage and willingness to tell the truth should be rewarded.

Nabb1:So, you're doing it not for it's own sake, but to make a point to other people and knock down a straw man you've set up. That's nice.

Straw man? I can't begin to count the thousands of times I've been told about 'Christian charity' as if there were no other kind. The religionists have made an industry out of showing everyone how charitable they are, and how that charity must flow from their religion.

So, you're saying that there are religious people who attribute the good things that happen in this world to something other than the positive workings of their belief system? That Christians in particular (since I'm fairly certain that's the overwhelming majority in Oklahoma) don't attribute positive things to "God's Grace"?

Huh. News to me.

Wow. That's a lot of inaccurate broad assumptions you've got going there. Is there some reason you seem so hateful of so many people who have never done you any harm? Sure, some may believe that. I know countless who don't. It's certainly not anything I was taught growing up. You can be prejudiced if you want, but at least get your facts straight.

The entirety of the religious system does immeasurable harm, every day. I know you're a believer, and you'll never agree, but seriously, it does.

I've honestly never met a person who identified as "religious" who did not see the world through the lens of their religion. In the Christian example - the one we often see cited - their god is thanked for all good, through his omnipotence (and by the way - he must be really relieved he no longer has to worry about fixing games for that Tebow dude)... but they never seem to hold their god accountable for the bad stuff that, if he's all-powerful, he either created or allowed. Why? Because God is all good. So, it's a model of ingrained circular reasoning, and something that is, indeed, drilled into believers by many means. That's just one.

Don't be surprised or shocked when those of us who don't believe refuse to let the assumption that we believe slide, refuse to put up with people who try to convince us that belief is as reasonable as reason, or refuse to be marginalized for not believing. And don't be surprised when we characterize behaviors like giving hard-earned money to a non-corporeal being, defense of child rape, veneration of religious leaders who are anything but moral, and deference to an ancient and much-edited text for advice on living rather than making one's own judgment, as "servile".

The impact of getting Rebecca and her family properly housed by the atheist community will do far more good than sitting in bars or chat rooms mocking people of faith. Like religion, free-thinking will be more easily spread through compassion and decency.

Unfortunately, those servile f*ckwits have an answer for that one. "It's just God acting in His own way, even through those atheists, isn't He clever!" they'll bleat. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Religious people are incapable of that kind of rational thought. Seriously.

Look, the woman interviewed was put in an awkward situation immediately following what was probably the worst/scariest/disastrous moment of her life. The real asshole is Wolf Blitzer for going around bothering people after they lost their homes, and quite possibly, family/friends.

I've never heard of the comedian that started the fundraiser. There was probably better ways he could of gone about this, but the end result is good. Can't argue with results.

Every time these threads come up and people come out of the woodwork to smack on atheists, I wonder what planet they're from. There are Christian fundies all over America forcing laws and policy, based on their religious values, onto all of us. From the Christian war on Planned Parenthood and reproductive rights, to the relegation of gays and lesbians as second-class citizens, to putting "Intelligent Design" into high school science class rooms, etc.

And that's just in America. Islamic countries have it worse.

"Atheist" is synonymous with "anti-theism," and their getting confrontational and somewhat militant is a natural, logical, and even MORAL response to what can be thought of as Christian Fascism in America. Atheism...Secularism...Humanism...whatever you want to call it...THEY'RE THE GOOD GUYS IN ALL OF THIS!

Maybe. Maybe not. He did this instead. Seems a little "on the nose" for me, but I also kind of get it. After that interview, that woman got a lot of grief from people - even locals - for having the gall to be atheist. This is kind of a "screw you" back to those people.

I don't get why a subset of these same people have groups, charities, people who wrote blogs and books, and are extremely vocal about their disdain for not collecting stamps and then biatch and whine when people point out their non-hobby "hobby".

This has been explained so many times that I'm not going to go into detail here, but you MUST know that that's an absurd comparison? People who don't collect stamps don't get threatened and discriminated against. People who don't collect stamps aren't legally prohibited from holding offices in some places. People who don't collect stamps are not rated as less trustworthy than criminals by the majority of Americans.

It's different because it's different. It's important to atheists because NON atheists MAKE it important.

Captain Dan:The parable of the Good Samaritan was intended to demonstrate the ethical imperative of helping all people, even those who you hate or have nothing in common with. Jesus's teachings on this could not be any more clear.

I don't know if you ever noticed this or not, but there are a lot of people who call themselves Christians that don't have anything to do with what you're talking about.

Sure about that? You've never seen a church raise money for its own members? Brother Ralph's house burned down, we're having a special collection today. Sister Francine needs surgery, so we're having a bake sale for her. It happens all the time.

This isn't a charity. It's people donating to an individual like themselves, the same as churches do.

And how many Christian charities make receiving their aid contingent upon listening to their sales pitch if you're not a member? It's not like it's without strings all the time. Sure, there are some really good ones that don't do that, but there are also plenty that do.

Lenny_da_Hog:I'm sure there are plenty of people who will be getting help from their local churches just because they're members of their local churches. Some little Baptist church right now likely has an collection for Sister Eunice and her brood.

But that is perfectly fine and just their way of expressing their beliefs.

It is so tiring hearing of the christian supermajority whine all the time about oppression and accuse atheists of being in your face the moment one of us steps out of the shadows.

No, not all religious folk are the same, but when there are so many of you even a minority can be larger and more vocal than the entire group of US atheists.

Why won't the moderate christians condem the actions of the crazies? How many times has an atheists challenged your beliefs to your face? Never? Once? Happens to be nearly every time I have ever discussed my lack of faith. We just suck it up 99 percent of the time, every time somebody says I will pray for you or god bless you we brush it off. But the time we say "oh actually I do not believe" then tards like Glenn Beck scream about how we are attention whores. No, you are just so used to everything being about religion that any minor challenge is an outrage.

log_jammin:I doubt this lady experiences more than a few whispers between coworkers about "did you hear she's an atheist?". and hopefully she won't even experience that until her home is rebuilt and her life is back in order. There is a lot of derp and derpers in red states, but for the most part, the people in them, don't worry themselves of what religion their coworkers are, or aren't.

starlost:how about the times a translator on a american tv station talks over what a person is saying in their native language and when the interviewee say "allah" the translator says "god" instead. you hear the interviewee say yabba dabba doo allah scooby doo and the translator says i thank god my child is safe.

What a totally not ignorant and not racist statement.

Lenny_da_Hog:Note that the report goes into great detail about missionary work and calls it a "ministry" over and over. They are providing aid, but they are more interested in spreading and reinforcing religious beliefs.

This, pretty much. It's one of the reasons I stopped donating to a local homeless shelter that I lived by when I first moved into Memphis a few years back. They were actually refusing people entry unless they attended their church service and bible study, and had a habit of excluding LGBT homeless.

It's also the reason I'll never. Ever. EVER. Support the Salvation Army in any way.

As I pointed out before, this is one of the major issues with disaster planning when engaging with Faith-based organizations. There are still churches out there that either A) Demand the right to evangelize or prosthelatize to the people they are aiding in a disaster, or B) Demand that they only help members of their congregation alone.

Lor M. Ipsum:Donating to people in need is great, but if you want to really send a message, donate to people regardless of their religion (or lack thereof). It seems like this is just driving the stake deeper in an already polarized debate.

This happens all the time, and is one of the major barriers that disaster planners and relief agencies have to work around when they are planning contengiency plans for these situations when involving faith based organizations. And I have far, far more respect for organizations like the United Methodist Church that help everyone (they have a huge kitchen ministry for disasters) than I do for some local church that only helps their congregation or religious belief. . And yes, people WILL refuse to help you after something like this if you are not of faith, or more accurately - their faith. The Red Cross tries to form agreesments with some churches that refuse to act as shelters along the principles of the Red Cross because they cannot actively evangalicise or restrict the people they help to only those of their faith.

People who accuse atheists of attention whoring simply because they say they are atheists are exactly the same as people who accuse gays of "shoving their gayness down our throats" for simply asking for equal rights, and thus they deserve the same scorn.

I'm a Christian, and I think it's completely rude to make assumptions about the religious beliefs of other people. It's a hundred times as rude to do so on TV. This shouldn't be about pitting one belief vs. another. This should be about Wolf being a dick to someone who just narrowly escaped tragedy.

stryed:I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Are you on the search for the Loch Ness Monster? Do you treat your illnesses solely with pyramid power? Are you scared you'll end up falling into space when you're on an airplane? If not, why don't you have the courage to juggle hypotheses and have an open mind?

It appears to me that what happened in this interview, is precisely the sort of thing I wish more people would say. Every time there is a disaster, someone is there praying to God to help them rebuild. There are a bunch of others who were not affected at all, praying to God to help also.WHERE WAS GOD BEFORE THE TRAGEDY?!?

And lets not forget about jerkoffs like Tim Teebow who literally pray to God every time he steps out on to the field. So, in his view, God is going to pay more attention to the game than to little children being smashed in a school, or any of the other gazillion tragedies that happen every day. Or music award shows, where the winning artists "thank you" speech always opens with "Thank God, of course". In other words, "Fark all the rest of you people. I've got 15 BMWs!!"

That's one of the things that has always annoyed me about religious types. And it's also the reason I think this woman answered that stupid farking question about whether she is thanking the Lord, she essentially said, "Fark you, you idiot! I don't even believe in God. Do you think this is helping any?!"

Donating to people in need is great, but if you want to really send a message, donate to people regardless of their religion (or lack thereof). It seems like this is just driving the stake deeper in an already polarized debate.

Nabb1:the fact that you spew hatred and vile and misinformation regarding people who do not share your worldview with the narrow-minded evangelicals I encountered growing up in parts of South Carolina. You're really not that much different when it comes down to your basic disdain for most of humanity.

Wow. Okay...

I'll just bow out here. You're not making sense and it's obvious you're upset.

I will say this: I don't disdain humanity. I disdain people who take advantage of other people and who indoctrinate them to be taken advantage of. And I disdain people who refuse to think.

On second thought, with that last one, perhaps I do disdain most humans. Hmm.

Well, most bigots are convinced of their own righteousness. ForThe record, I have absolutely nothing against atheists or atheism, and my own religios beliefs are more accurately described as agnostic, but my family is Catholic. So, when you launch into malicious missives against people of faith, don't mistake my disagreement of having anything to do with your faith or lack thereof, but with the fact that you spew hatred and vile and misinformation regarding people who do not share your worldview with the narrow-minded evangelicals I encountered growing up in parts of South Carolina. You're really not that much different when it comes down to your basic disdain for most of humanity.

Benevolent Misanthrope:Unfortunately, those servile f*ckwits have an answer for that one. "It's just God acting in His own way, even through those atheists, isn't He clever!" they'll bleat. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Religious people are incapable of that kind of rational thought. Seriously.

Religious people, just like atheists, come in all shapes and sizes, some of which have their heads up their asses.

Just as you probably wouldn't like people to think all atheists are bloviating anti-theists, it's probably not a good idea toclaim all religious people act or think the same way.

Techhell:Evilhippie: stryed: I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

I think you'll find that most atheists define themselves as not being able to disprove the existence of a god or gods, but rather say that the evidence presented makes it highly improbably they exist. In fact much like most religious feel about just about any other god than the one(s) they happen to believe in.I think in that way many atheists actually have been on a long journey down the path you describe as "I don't know, but let's find out". In fact studies show that atheists as a group generally know more about religion and the religious scriptures than those who define themselves as religious. I think this is directly linked to a more inquisitive nature among most atheists compared to most religious.

I think you're right... except in the same way that most Christians are pretty much "Do unto others" sorts of Christians. Which most people quite like, because they're quite willing to say "You're an atheist? Could you watch my kids on Sunday night while my husband and I are at a church function? We'll watch yours on Tuesday night in return?". Most atheists are quite willing to say that they can't disprove the existence of the supernatural and leave it at that.

The atheists that we generally hear from in the media are the atheists who say "There Is No God! You're Stupid For Believing In God!" just like we generally hear the Christians who say "Did you just say "Happy Holidays"? STOP OPPRESSING ME!". Nice, polite, well reasoned and reasonable people just don't make the 24hr news cycle, sort of like how only the most flamboyant of the posters here get things heated. The ones who are reasonable and polite we just read, nod in agreement, maybe press "Smart", and go on. It's the ones we think of as idiots that we reply to.

...

I don't think this is fair. The argument that atheists are really making when you see them on the news is, "Look, people can believe whatever they like, but the Governor should not make a governmental decree that all citizens should pray for rain." Check out the Freedom From Religion Foundation. All they want is for the Establishment Clause to be respected and they get and report on a ton of unpleasantness from religious people.

You don't understand that the language naturally implies a term for a group of people?

To dumb it down:

I get why people don't collect stamps.

I don't get why a subset of these same people have groups, charities, people who wrote blogs and books, and are extremely vocal about their disdain for not collecting stamps and then biatch and whine when people point out their non-hobby "hobby".

When stamp collectors are the majority, and use their stamp collecting to control the political process to exclude non-stamp collectors, exclude people socially for not being stamp collectors, and publicly make statements regularly that whenever bad things happen randomly to non-stamp collectors that they deserved to be harmed due to their non-stamp collecting then you would have a valid analogy.

kimmygibblershomework:nekom: Helping out a person who happens to be an atheist? Fantastic.Helping out a person BECAUSE she's an atheist? Well, it's still helping, but it's a pretty dick motivation.

same here. Now if the atheists set up soup kitchens and help millions eat each year, they will be on a level playing field with the christians they despise so much. i say despise, because look at tfa. Come on liberal elites, you can do it ;)

/get fsm to fix my shift key, too

We do, we just don't generally do it under YE OLDE ATHEIST BANNER, and when some do...well hey lookie lookie. And as to 'despise' I know Christians loooove to play the underdog and the persecution card, but that's farking redonkulous.

I'm more than willing to bet I've done more for humanity than most 'Christians', and with zero expectation of reward in the hereafter. Nor do I do it to impress anyone about atheism. I do it because I'm a humanist. And if someone can come up and say 'nuh uh...' then I say...WOOT! Great! Awesome! More help for more people, woo hoo. Because THAT is the farking goal.

The Billdozer:Its important because you want it to be. I'll give you a life tip: Although discrimination of all types exists, more and more people are fine tuning it to discriminate against one type... Assholes. Blitzer was an asshole for leading the interview this way and asking a loaded question, the lady was an asshole for having to have her 15 seconds of internet neckbeard fame for proclaiming her non-faith which had jack shiat to do with the situation, and Stanhope is an asshole because he's using this opportunity to further his own shiatty agenda and career.

Benevolent Misanthrope:Don't be surprised or shocked when those of us who don't believe refuse to let the assumption that we believe slide, refuse to put up with people who try to convince us that belief is as reasonable as reason, or refuse to be marginalized for not believing. And don't be surprised when we characterize behaviors like giving hard-earned money to a non-corporeal being, defense of child rape, veneration of religious leaders who are anything but moral, and deference to ...

You're not an atheist, you're an anti-theist. And you're doing a brilliant job of reinforcing the negative stereotype too many people have of atheists.

nekom:Helping out a person who happens to be an atheist? Fantastic.Helping out a person BECAUSE she's an atheist? Well, it's still helping, but it's a pretty dick motivation.

This is idiotic. Name a church that doesn't look out and help out their membership SOLELY because they are in the church.

That's right, someone does for an atheist what churches do for Christians EVERY DAY, and you call it "dick motivation". So I wonder what your opinion is of the church that helps its membership because they are christian. (and less so because jesus said to be nice to other people)

You know at the end of the day, I'm sure this lady couldn't give a flying flip what group wants to help her only that they do want to help her. She lost her home. She lost her neighborhood. She probably lost her car as well. She has a child to look after. And I am sure all she wants is a roof over her head and food in her belly.

If an atheist group has raised over 79 grand, I only hope that she sees every penny and that it helps her get her life back as close to normal as she can get it.

This whole thread is trivial. (Which, is basically what Fark arguments are. Often amusing but trivial.) So, if you think atheists are better than religious people, stop arguing and donate. If you think atheists are full of it in that line of belief, stop arguing and donate too.

Kids are expensive. Houses aren't cheap. Neither is therapy, which I am sure after going through this ordeal, she's going to need. 79 grand is nice but more would help.

Here there comes a practical question which has often troubled me. Whenever I go into a foreign country or a prison or any similar place they always ask me what is my religion. I never know whether I should say "Agnostic" or whether I should say "Atheist". It is a very difficult question and I daresay that some of you have been troubled by it. As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods. None of us would seriously consider the possibility that all the gods of homer really exist, and yet if you were to set to work to give a logical demonstration that Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, and the rest of them did not exist you would find it an awful job. You could not get such proof. Therefore, in regard to the Olympic gods, speaking to a purely philosophical audience, I would say that I am an Agnostic. But speaking popularly, I think that all of us would say in regard to those gods that we were Atheists. In regard to the Christian God, I should, I think, take exactly the same line.

Richard Dawkins has been heavily influenced by Russell, and he has really paraphrased this position as his own. And over and over, I see him characterized as an asshole for doing so. If it isn't this stance that makes him an asshole, but something else, I'd be curious to know; so far, every time I've asked someone who has called Dawkins an asshole for a specific quote or act that makes him one, they have left the thread.

It amuses me that some Christians take offense to the idea that their god should be lumped in with other gods that people have worshiped throughout history. Their dogma is plausible, whereas that other dogma is just ridiculous.

tenpoundsofcheese:gimmegimme: tenpoundsofcheese: I May Be Crazy But...: tenpoundsofcheese: /i wonder how many atheists believe in karma

A fair number, actually. Now that I have your attention, I have to explain a bit. They probably don't believe explicitly in karma, but something similar. And they aren't the flavor of atheist that I am (I'm the "there's nothing that science can't explain" type) but they certainly don't believe in any sort of god or god-like figure.

Okay, but they believe in some sort of magical power in the sky that balances things out.

same thing for people who believe in luck, or superstition, or wearing a lucky shirt, or wearing your team baseball cap at a 30 degree angle during a game.

You're right; all magical thinking is stupid. There is, however, a big difference between wearing a lucky ballcap to "help" your team and believing that your magical invisible friend in the sky told you to treat another human being like crap because they don't believe in that same deity.

Some people knock on wood in a futile effort to tilt metaphysics in their favor, others use their belief in Mr. Kolob to deprive fellow Americans of civil rights.

No, I don't think there is a difference.At the end of the day each believes in magic.

Some use that belief to help others, some for selfish reasons, some to do harm as you noted

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, and that's why most atheists strike back against magical thinking, particularly the forms that cause so many problems in the world. (Religion, anti-vaxxers, etc.)

tenpoundsofcheese:Cupajo: nekom: Helping out a person who happens to be an atheist? Fantastic.Helping out a person BECAUSE she's an atheist? Well, it's still helping, but it's a pretty dick motivation.

I would say it's more "helping out someone who had the courage to say she was an atheist on national TV in a country where such proclamations are generally scorned by a bullying Christian majority."

awwww, the atheists are now feeling that they are being bullied.awwww, poor babies, because we all know that the atheists never, ever, have any scorn for Christians.

French philosopher Blaise Pascal reasoned that even though God may not exist, you should wager that he does, because you have everything to gain, and nothing to lose. (new window)

And Pascal's wager is flawed for several reasons:

Fallacy One: It assumes that there is only one god which can be believed in, the Christian one. This is not true, since there are thousands of gods that have been worshiped throughout time. This would have to be applied to each and every one of those gods to be true, and this would clearly be impossible, due to the clashing natures of many of the said gods.

Fallacy Two: It assumes that simply wagering on God will buy one entrance into Heaven. While this may be so, the Wager does not instill a belief, it instills an appearance of a belief. Since the god in question is presumed to be all-knowing, he would be able to tell a false from a true belief. Therefore, the belief from the Wager would not qualify should belief be the requirement for entrance into Heaven.

Fallacy Three: It ignores too many alternate possibilities - some of which are addressed by existing religions, and some which are not. Some examples: A God could reward on criteria which seem meaningless to us - hair color, taste in clothes, music etc. or A God might not be concerned with humans at all - the universe could be here for hydrogen for all we know. Or God may even reward those who don't believe.

Some Bass Playing Guy:Benevolent Misanthrope:Unfortunately, those servile f*ckwits have an answer for that one. "It's just God acting in His own way, even through those atheists, isn't He clever!" they'll bleat. There are none so blind as those who will not see. Religious people are incapable of that kind of rational thought. Seriously.

Religious people, just like atheists, come in all shapes and sizes, some of which have their heads up their asses.

Just as you probably wouldn't like people to think all atheists are bloviating anti-theists, it's probably not a good idea toclaim all religious people act or think the same way.

As a religious type person myself, I am happy to inform you those types seem to be restricted to the internet. I've only encountered one in the real world and he seemed to become even more crazy irate, in his odd religious extremist without the deity way, when he was informed that those of us in my religion don't DO those things he claims to hate. He didn't even know what it was, just that I was a moron and mentally ill because I didn't believe the same way he did. This attitude used to come from the "other side", but with cool shiat like demons and hellfire and other things that appeal to my metal head wench sensibilities.

I do not blame atheists for the behavior of a few anti-theists. I don't even put you guys in the same category. An extremist is an extremist is an extremist. The belief in a deity or the belief there is no deity is secondary, just as it should be.

eggrolls:I think the bigger issue here is that Wolf Blitzer assumes everyone is Oklahoma is a bible thumping moron that he can goad into a paroxysms of religious fervor by asking them if they thank the lerd for not being dead today, so he can get it on camera.

Okies should tell Blitzer to suck a bag of dicks every time he shows up on what's left of their porch.

That was kinda my reaction. Who the hell asks about religion (unprompted, at least) when they're talking to a lady whose house just blew away?

What would be really cool is if she took the money and donated it to the rest of her community as well. She seems like the type of person awesome enough to do that. May empathy from other humans or god help these people who are suffering, whichever we need to believe (or both).

DoctorCal:I think it's quite possible that Wolf is patronizing her, and hoping for a highly emotional, affirmative response just for the entertainment value.

I mean, he's Jewish, so...thank the Lord, thank the Lord doesn't seem like it would be his sincere reaction.

? Because Jews haven't heard of God?

If you watch the video, the first time he asks her she says "yuh." After he presser her, "Do you thank the Lord?" she says, "Actually, I'm an atheist." That's not attention whoring. There is somebody downtown with a bullhorn right now berating people for not having the loud person's identical beliefs. That's attention whoring. I'm going to give her a donation just for getting Wolf to STFU with his assumptions about her.There was also the "lost dog" woman, who when the interviewer asked "Are you able to comprehend yet what happened here?" and she said "I know exactly what happened here."I have to admit that these two women gave me a lot more respect for the people of Oklahoma. No tears and self-pity, just straightforward plain speaking.

YouAreIncorrect:gimmegimme:I don't know. Early morning Saturday ramblings, but I hope that sheds some light on the difference between your majority of Christians and mine. :)

[www.religiouscriticism.com image 500x342]

That's such a stupid quote. Saying god is malevolent because he doesn't prevent every bad thing makes no sense. Most Americans could help many starving Africans by donating their money, but they don't and not doing so doesn't mean they wish evil upon them.

Most Americans aren't the all-loving omnipotent creator of the Universe either.

YouAreIncorrect:gimmegimme:I don't know. Early morning Saturday ramblings, but I hope that sheds some light on the difference between your majority of Christians and mine. :)

[www.religiouscriticism.com image 500x342]

That's such a stupid quote. Saying god is malevolent because he doesn't prevent every bad thing makes no sense. Most Americans could help many starving Africans by donating their money, but they don't and not doing so doesn't mean they wish evil upon them.

Huh. So what you're saying is that the world operates as it would if there were no god at all.

Evilhippie:stryed: I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

I think you'll find that most atheists define themselves as not being able to disprove the existence of a god or gods, but rather say that the evidence presented makes it highly improbably they exist. In fact much like most religious feel about just about any other god than the one(s) they happen to believe in.I think in that way many atheists actually have been on a long journey down the path you describe as "I don't know, but let's find out". In fact studies show that atheists as a group generally know more about religion and the religious scriptures than those who define themselves as religious. I think this is directly linked to a more inquisitive nature among most atheists compared to most religious.

I think you're right... except in the same way that most Christians are pretty much "Do unto others" sorts of Christians. Which most people quite like, because they're quite willing to say "You're an atheist? Could you watch my kids on Sunday night while my husband and I are at a church function? We'll watch yours on Tuesday night in return?". Most atheists are quite willing to say that they can't disprove the existence of the supernatural and leave it at that.

The atheists that we generally hear from in the media are the atheists who say "There Is No God! You're Stupid For Believing In God!" just like we generally hear the Christians who say "Did you just say "Happy Holidays"? STOP OPPRESSING ME!". Nice, polite, well reasoned and reasonable people just don't make the 24hr news cycle, sort of like how only the most flamboyant of the posters here get things heated. The ones who are reasonable and polite we just read, nod in agreement, maybe press "Smart", and go on. It's the ones we think of as idiots that we reply to.

Waldo Pepper:I seriously doubt she will face any repercussions for being an atheist in Ok, She might get some churches going out to minister to her and her family but that is about it. As an Atheist living in the South, I can tell you that when I was growing up, I went to church just to keep up appearances out of fear of being attacked by people for being a heathen.And I can also tell you that in a great many protestant churches, starting in youth groups, people are taught that others are Atheists because they hate God, and because they hate everything Christ stands for. Oh, and they have Satan at their right ear whispering to them./no lie. This is ACTUALLY what my Youth Group pastor preached about.

1) Blitzer is an ass for asking that question. It was weird, unnecessary and highly inappropriate.

2) That woman seemed scared to answer. She hesitated and then after she said it her laugh was very nervous. Then she made a point of saying she had no problem with others praying to god... again a sign that she was scared of repercussions. The fact we live in a society where people are afraid to openly admit they don't believe in god is disgusting.

3) Glenn Beck made an interesting point about how maybe a producer find out in a pre interview that she was an atheist and got Wolf to ask her to push the "atheist agenda". However it seems far more likely that Blitzer saw that she was an atheist and being the ass he is decided to put her on the spot and get her to say she prayed to god or out herself. In which case he is an even bigger ass than I thought.4) I love Doug Stanhope but he is an ENORMOUS ass and I'm not sure even I would want to be affiliated with him in any real world way. Frankly I'm surprised that guy hasn't gotten shot for some of the stuff he says. I wonder how the young mother feels about his act and now having the world linking her to him.

Nabb1:Dinki: Nabb1: So, you're doing it not for it's own sake, but to make a point to other people and knock down a straw man you've set up. That's nice.

Straw man? I can't begin to count the thousands of times I've been told about 'Christian charity' as if there were no other kind. The religionists have made an industry out of showing everyone how charitable they are, and how that charity must flow from their religion.

Of course. I am sure it is as you say.

It wouldn't even have come up if ol' Wolf hadn't made the HUGE assumption she was christian. Wolf is the dick in this story, he had no reason as a journalist to mention any diety.

My wife and I are part of that crazy little group who consider ourselves "liberal Christians." We both grew up in KS in the United Methodist Church. And we've both been to church nearly every single Sunday (although not as much since we relocated for my job). And nothing grinds our gears more than getting roped in with the fanatical, bible-beating, ignorant types. Just because they make more noise does not make them representative of an entire religion.

I've done a lot of mission work, including rebuilding houses destroyed by Katrina, and tornado relief in Tennessee. And I'm not asking for a pat on the back right now. I'm telling you this that I did all that work with NO expectation of praise, reward, or anything else. I did it knowing that I was helping someone out. I wasn't evangelizing to those homeowners, or trying to convert them to my way of thinking. Just helping them because they needed it. Is it that hard to believe that there are other Christians like me out there?

Help is help. Does it matter where it comes from as long as everyone's getting it who needs it?

As long as you can feel superior to someone, the time you wasted writing that out was well worth it!

Putting that out after condemning a whole group of people, is beyond funny, it's inadvertently ironic in a way I suppose says infinitely more about your way of thinking than anything I could posit. Thanks for that.

DrewFL:Such a passive aggressive and elitist thing to do...Because Stanhope had media and a figurehead he made a bullshiat point for no ones benefit but his own (im sure the "randomly atheist" winner was vetted and their home inspected for F5 code. Just shiatty. it's the belt buckle of the USA. People are religious there. It was an exceedingly mean and shiatty thing to do.

Why is it "mean and shiatty" to raise money for someone whose house has been blown down in a tornado?? If that is mean and shiatty, I wish everyone in the world was so "mean and shiatty".

Note to self: Next time in an interview after a tornado on a cable news network and asked if I thanked the lord for this, replay with, "I am indeed grateful that the lord saw fit to veer the tornado over the elementary school in order to spare me".

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom:lol at the thought of this woman being in danger because she's an atheist in Oklahoma. Some of you weirdos really need to get out more

Seriously. I'm from Bama, been an atheist since 15, and never had a big bunch of Christians come up and try to attack me because I'm an atheist. I think these people in these big urban centers must have been gradually creating more and more absurd and elaborate urban legends about what the rest of the country is like outside of their particular city.

"They all have assault rifles they carry all the time, even to church -which they go to twice a day-, and if you're black or say that you're an Atheist they shoot you!!"

Captain Dan:hardinparamedic: As I pointed out before... the American Red Cross will flat out refuse an offer from a church or homeless shelter to shelter victims after a disaster if they try to pull that shiat...

Okay. Let me rephrase my statement: "The overwhelming majority of Christian charities don't limit aid to Christian victims, and the few who do deserve to be kicked right in the ass, by good Christians and good atheists alike."

Uh-huh.

The North American Mission Board exists to work with churches, associations and state conventions in mobilizing Southern Baptists as a missional force to impact North America with the gospel of Jesus Christ through evangelism and church planting.

Note that the missionary work is not limited to disaster relief. Disaster relief is just another mission for conversion.

And here is their report on their missionary work: Within hours of the deadly EF5 tornado striking Moore, Okla., on Monday, Southern Baptist Disaster Relief chaplains were ministering to families at both elementary schools in the community destroyed by the storm.

Note that the report goes into great detail about missionary work and calls it a "ministry" over and over. They are providing aid, but they are more interested in spreading and reinforcing religious beliefs.

Lenny_da_Hog:And how many Christian charities make receiving their aid contingent upon listening to their sales pitch if you're not a member? It's not like it's without strings all the time. Sure, there are some really good ones that don't do that, but there are also plenty that do.

I've attended over a dozen churches across the country and never encountered that.

If a church did that, I would call them out on their bullshiat. Selective aid is un-Christian behavior, and any church who practiced it would deserve all the ignominy they receive.

The parable of the Good Samaritan was intended to demonstrate the ethical imperative of helping all people, even those who you hate or have nothing in common with. Jesus's teachings on this could not be any more clear.

Offering her help because she's an atheist is bullshiat. That's like offering a whites-only scholarship.

Christian charities don't limit aid to Christian victims. If atheists want to demonstrate their bona (sine) fides, they need to offer help to anyone who needs it, regardless of tribal/religious affiliation.

Mystery Vortex:The great irony is that atheists are every bit as judgmental and sanctimonious as evangelical Christians, and they have no idea. Yet they claim to be of superior intelligence. What a farce.

abb3w:So, this comedian has raised $80,000 from atheists for helping one prominent atheist in Oklahoma. In contrast, the Foundation Beyond Belief has only raised circa $40,000 for general crisis relief for the Tornado. So, it appears atheists may be as subject to in-group bias as Christians.

Well, that's farking depressing....

In-group bias isn't the only thing in play here; it's also a case of the specific versus the general. I.e. people have a stronger emotional response towards particular stories than broader topics that aren't tied to specific names and faces (even when the latter involve a much higher amount of total suffering).

Mind you, both things are depressing in their own right - just in different ways.

Waldo Pepper:I find it amazing how much time atheist spend in fark threads trying to justify their non belief. That much time spent doesn't seem logical.

It's almost as silly as erecting thousands of buildings, spending time on television and radio programs, complete publishing companies with books and tracts, and spending hours and hours in those buildings in with that media every week.

Waldo Pepper:I find it amazing how much time atheist spend in fark threads trying to justify their non belief. That much time spent doesn't seem logical.

The time is spent:

- correcting the misconceptions and lies that the religious spread about us- discussing the unconstitutional religious laws that the religions are constantly trying to enact- discussing the blatant lies that the religious are constantly, and often successfully, trying to get into science curriculums to indoctrinate our children with- etc

Protecting our rights and dispelling lies about us is worth the effort.

BarkingUnicorn:No more than Hemingway, who wrote, ""There's no one thing that's true.It's all true."

Well, I'm starting to think you're being deliberately obtuse. Can you imagine a judge saying such a thing to a jury? Of course not. I love literature and it can be mined for emotional truth and so on. But circular reasoning is not proof of something in reality.

BarkingUnicorn:gimmegimme: BarkingUnicorn: LasersHurt: Waldo Pepper: I think you will find that at some point atheism will be classified as a religion of sort.

There's no way to do it.

Sure there is, and it's already in motion. The primary definition of "religion" is "the service or worship of God or the supernatural." But more recent, expansive definitions include things like, "a cause, principle,, or system of beliefs held to with ardor or faith." Atheism fits comfortably within the latter. When we get to the point where religion is simply a belief system that relies upon faith, then atheism is a religion.

There are definite advantages to being considered a religious person. Atheists might consider them before rejecting the label.

Which dictionary are you using? (You might want to cite such things in the future.)

Merriam-Webster. Ffs, do not use dictionary.com, it's no more lexicography than About.com is encyclopedic.

it doesn't really matter what dictionary you use. You'll find examples of such expansion everywhere, including in legislation and policies designed to protect "strongly-held personal beliefs."

Well, I'm sure language will keep evolving (as it always has) to ensure that people who believe in reality can differentiate themselves from those who don't.

gimmegimme:IlGreven: Voiceofreason01: We can argue semantics about what is and isn't "mainstream atheism" but Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher are both extremely vocal and in a lot of people's eyes are pretty representative of atheists in general(yes I know that they're not) and they're both assholes with their anti-theism.

...the fact that theists lump Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins together says more about them than either Maher or Dawkins. They are not at all alike. Maher's definitely the bigger asshole in this picture. People only think Dawkins is an asshole because he had the temerity to name a book "The God Delusion".

No they're not equivalent but they all stem from the same basic problem: bigotry, ignorance and tribalism and those are the issues that need to be addressed. As long as people look across the pew/aisle/fence/whatever and see someone different from themselves and hate them for those differences we're going to have problems; and call me a romantic but I tend to believe that it's the hatred and not the differences that are the problem.

I don't get why a subset of these same people have groups, charities, people who wrote blogs and books, and are extremely vocal about their disdain for not collecting stamps and then biatch and whine when people point out their non-hobby "hobby".

Though your initial statement was indeed dumb; most blanket statements tend to be. I agree your following attempt to explain your bigoted opinion is even dumber. I'm not even going to waste time explaining why, since you can just read up on the last couple of post.

As long as you can feel superior to someone, the time you wasted writing that out was well worth it!

There you go. Whether you believe or disbelieve; tolerate or discriminate; abstain or fark; you do it to feel better.

Captain Dan:Lenny_da_Hog: And how many Christian charities make receiving their aid contingent upon listening to their sales pitch if you're not a member? It's not like it's without strings all the time. Sure, there are some really good ones that don't do that, but there are also plenty that do.

I've attended over a dozen churches across the country and never encountered that.

If a church did that, I would call them out on their bullshiat. Selective aid is un-Christian behavior, and any church who practiced it would deserve all the ignominy they receive.

The parable of the Good Samaritan was intended to demonstrate the ethical imperative of helping all people, even those who you hate or have nothing in common with. Jesus's teachings on this could not be any more clear.

Assemblies of God churches are pretty big on this actually. I went to help from them (I actually attended their church) but because I didn't go through their leadership program to become an official member, they denied the ability to help me. A bit later they built a huge addition to the church, a fountain, and a school (which they charge to attend.) I could point out quite a few churches that have no problem taking tithes from you as a "non-member" though.

This lesson in "Christianity" taught me that I'll find God without an organization or an asshole trying to sell me salvation.

/"New Life" church Renton/Maple Valley, WA is full of self serving hypocritical assholes by the way. Beautiful corporate campus though.

IlGreven:Voiceofreason01: We can argue semantics about what is and isn't "mainstream atheism" but Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher are both extremely vocal and in a lot of people's eyes are pretty representative of atheists in general(yes I know that they're not) and they're both assholes with their anti-theism.

...the fact that theists lump Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins together says more about them than either Maher or Dawkins. They are not at all alike. Maher's definitely the bigger asshole in this picture. People only think Dawkins is an asshole because he had the temerity to name a book "The God Delusion".

Voiceofreason01:We can argue semantics about what is and isn't "mainstream atheism" but Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher are both extremely vocal and in a lot of people's eyes are pretty representative of atheists in general(yes I know that they're not) and they're both assholes with their anti-theism.

...the fact that theists lump Bill Maher and Richard Dawkins together says more about them than either Maher or Dawkins. They are not at all alike. Maher's definitely the bigger asshole in this picture. People only think Dawkins is an asshole because he had the temerity to name a book "The God Delusion".

Voiceofreason01:umad: As they should be. Agnostics are more obnoxious than fundies or atheists can ever hope to be. You found a way to feel superior to both groups, so CONGRATULATIONS, HAVE A FARKING COOKIE.

so having a life philosophy that doesn't insist on you being a raging lunatic or a complete asshole is a bad thing?

A life philosophy that gives the same respect to the irrational as it does to the rational is indeed a bad thing. Grow a spine and start using your farking brain already.

Captain Dan:Offering her help because she's an atheist is bullshiat. That's like offering a whites-only scholarship.

Actually, that's a really poor analogy. In every way imaginable, atheists would be considered a minority in America (especially in America!). So it's like offering a specific-minority-only scholarship... of which there are many.

stryed:I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

lol. It doesn't take any courage at all to avoid making a choice. It is exactly the opposite. I will take the "there is a god" hypothesis seriously as soon as you idiots can provide a single bit of evidence that one exists. I won't be holding my breath.

tenpoundsofcheese:No, I don't think there is a difference.At the end of the day each believes in magic.

Ask the person who is superstitiously wearing a ball cap to help their sports team if they really believe that they are magically improving their team's chances and most will say no. It is part of the fun of being a sports fanatic ... not usually an actual belief in magic (unlike religion).

I'm an atheist and I never got why people have such strong reactions to the occasional thank god, you're blessed, or other such stuff. It's just a social formula you mouth, like when you tell the taxi driver you'll never see again if your life to take care and have a nice day. If someone preaches to me, I'll respond, but just smile, say thanks, and accept as the social nicety it was meant as.

tenpoundsofcheese:I May Be Crazy But...: tenpoundsofcheese: /i wonder how many atheists believe in karma

A fair number, actually. Now that I have your attention, I have to explain a bit. They probably don't believe explicitly in karma, but something similar. And they aren't the flavor of atheist that I am (I'm the "there's nothing that science can't explain" type) but they certainly don't believe in any sort of god or god-like figure.

Okay, but they believe in some sort of magical power in the sky that balances things out.

same thing for people who believe in luck, or superstition, or wearing a lucky shirt, or wearing your team baseball cap at a 30 degree angle during a game.

You're right; all magical thinking is stupid. There is, however, a big difference between wearing a lucky ballcap to "help" your team and believing that your magical invisible friend in the sky told you to treat another human being like crap because they don't believe in that same deity.

Some people knock on wood in a futile effort to tilt metaphysics in their favor, others use their belief in Mr. Kolob to deprive fellow Americans of civil rights.

LouDobbsAwaaaay:She's going to need those funds to emigrate out of OK, now that people know she's an atheist. Some teabagger is going to exercise his 2nd Amendment solutions on her if she doesn't get out of town.

People don't like to have their comfortable dogma challenged.

"There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably some part of him is aware that they are myths and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dare not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes furious when they are disputed." - Bertrand Russell

A fair number, actually. Now that I have your attention, I have to explain a bit. They probably don't believe explicitly in karma, but something similar. And they aren't the flavor of atheist that I am (I'm the "there's nothing that science can't explain" type) but they certainly don't believe in any sort of god or god-like figure.

I don't believe in Karma. Vile people get away with all sorts of evil shiat all the time. What goes around does not necessarily come around. You do not always reap what you sow. The sooner people stop believing in this Just World/Karma/The Secret crap, the sooner we can start actually improving the world we really do have.

Ant:gimmegimme: Ant: log_jammin: I can't give my feelings on this matter until Rebecca Watson tells me if it's rooted in sexism or not.

I honestly don't understand why everyone hates her so much. "Guys, don't do that" is not exactly the kind of phrase I would expect could bring down such hatred.

Unfortunately, she didn't stop there. The Atheism+ bullies are trying to turn a movement about resisting theocracy into yet another radical feminist echo chamber.

I just don't see it. I admit that sometimes my immediate knee-jerk reaction to some of their criticisms and complaints is "Oh, give me a farking break!", but usually when I've read their point of view on the subject, it makes sense why they might take offense to things that are said and done every day without thought.

Check out some of Thunderf00t's thoughts on the subject. I don't know why the FTB don't just create their own radical feminist organization; that would be fine. But it has nothing to do with skepticism or freethought.

gimmegimme:Ant: log_jammin: I can't give my feelings on this matter until Rebecca Watson tells me if it's rooted in sexism or not.

I honestly don't understand why everyone hates her so much. "Guys, don't do that" is not exactly the kind of phrase I would expect could bring down such hatred.

Unfortunately, she didn't stop there. The Atheism+ bullies are trying to turn a movement about resisting theocracy into yet another radical feminist echo chamber.

I just don't see it. I admit that sometimes my immediate knee-jerk reaction to some of their criticisms and complaints is "Oh, give me a farking break!", but usually when I've read their point of view on the subject, it makes sense why they might take offense to things that are said and done every day without thought.

I think the bigger issue here is that Wolf Blitzer assumes everyone is Oklahoma is a bible thumping moron that he can goad into a paroxysms of religious fervor by asking them if they thank the lerd for not being dead today, so he can get it on camera.

Okies should tell Blitzer to suck a bag of dicks every time he shows up on what's left of their porch.

part of the problem:If you are depending on atheist compassion and deceny to spread atheisim.... the future of religion is very bright indeed. Atheists are not self aware enough to realize that their arrogant self important pathological behavior is a bigger turn off to the merely non-religious than to theists.

That projection is so massive, I had to be sure I was laying in bed and not at the local Drive-In.

That's such a stupid quote. Saying god is malevolent because he doesn't prevent every bad thing makes no sense. Most Americans could help many starving Africans by donating their money, but they don't and not doing so doesn't mean they wish evil upon them.

You are in all seriousness comparing the flawed mammal, that is callled man, to a being of infinite goodness and power? Because either you are limiting the god-being to the confinements of human behaviourism or you grant mankind the same expectancy that you would bestow upon a divine, omnipotent and infinitely good being.Either way, I think you are confused with the point the quote is making.

Once again, you're adding attributes to the christian god that has never been claimed. Omnipotent yes, but all good? Where is that claimed?

1 John 4:7-8Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.

I was raised protestant, and our preacher was very big on god being all-loving and all good. Of course during the ages Christians have bickered over who or what God is, as they still do. And there's definitely many examples of worship of a rather vengeful and capricious god, of which you could find many quotes in the bible to base of off.But if you seriously are saying that Christian preachers do not preach of an all-loving, and benevolent god, I don't think we are from the same planet. Certainly you can pretty much find bible quotes to "support" the claim of a malignant god.

When I said who claims it I meant from the bible (or god) itself, not preachers, but fair enough with providing the quote. My take on that is actions speak louder than words, and god certainly isn't portrayed as all loving through actions.

I'm simply saying he would fit more in a father figure role, where sometimes you have to let bad crap happen even if you can prevent it.

That's such a stupid quote. Saying god is malevolent because he doesn't prevent every bad thing makes no sense. Most Americans could help many starving Africans by donating their money, but they don't and not doing so doesn't mean they wish evil upon them.

You are in all seriousness comparing the flawed mammal, that is callled man, to a being of infinite goodness and power? Because either you are limiting the god-being to the confinements of human behaviourism or you grant mankind the same expectancy that you would bestow upon a divine, omnipotent and infinitely good being.Either way, I think you are confused with the point the quote is making.

Once again, you're adding attributes to the christian god that has never been claimed. Omnipotent yes, but all good? Where is that claimed?

1 John 4:7-8Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.

I was raised protestant, and our preacher was very big on god being all-loving and all good. Of course during the ages Christians have bickered over who or what God is, as they still do. And there's definitely many examples of worship of a rather vengeful and capricious god, of which you could find many quotes in the bible to base of off.But if you seriously are saying that Christian preachers do not preach of an all-loving, and benevolent god, I don't think we are from the same planet. Certainly you can pretty much find bible quotes to "support" the claim of a malignant god.

Waldo Pepper:I seriously doubt she will face any repercussions for being an atheist in Ok, She might get some churches going out to minister to her and her family but that is about it.

I really hope not but I live in a FAR more liberal area than OK and I just keep my mouth shut about religion/politics. Hell, I'm not even a full fledged atheist and although I don't think Jebus was the son of god (in the magical/mystical sense) I still think it's quite possible, even probable he or someone like him at the time existed and that he was a pretty damned awesome guy. The thing is some people are unreasonable and even if there is only a small percentage of them all it takes is one unreasonable person to ruin your life if they decide to. The fact they are raising money for her is nice but personally I'm not sure I'd consider that a fair trade off for this kind of national exposure. Then again I'm not dumb enough to talk to reporters. Seriously why do people give those leeches the time of day? They very rarely have good intentions and once the spin machine kicks up bad bad things can happen. Not worth it just to get my ugly mug "on 'da tayvay".

planes:French philosopher Blaise Pascal reasoned that even though God may not exist, you should wager that he does, because you have everything to gain, and nothing to lose. (new window)

Not only does this assume there's only one god (least you be at risk of believing in the WRONG god) but it assumes that the god you've chosen to worship is too stupid to not realize you're only believing as a hedge bet and won't flag you for it.=Smidge=

LasersHurt:The Billdozer: Its important because you want it to be. I'll give you a life tip: Although discrimination of all types exists, more and more people are fine tuning it to discriminate against one type... Assholes. Blitzer was an asshole for leading the interview this way and asking a loaded question, the lady was an asshole for having to have her 15 seconds of internet neckbeard fame for proclaiming her non-faith which had jack shiat to do with the situation, and Stanhope is an asshole because he's using this opportunity to further his own shiatty agenda and career.

So you are simply ignorant and dismissive.

You must be new here, LasersHurt. Welcome to Fark! Yes indeed, the persona of "The Billdozer" is quite ignorant and dismissive about many things, this being just one of a litany of examples! But he can be so much fun to read and wonder "Just how much of this stuff does his creator actually believe, how much has he come to believe, and how many times is he sitting at a keyboard googling "Crazy Things People Say", copying and pasting then changing enough words to not be a direct plagiarism of someone else?"

And, of course, in the end it doesn't matter what the answer is because it can be so much fun to pinch the persona's cheeks and troll with "Who's a cute little troll? Who's a cute little troll! You are! You are!"

That's the thing about a philosophical belief that doesn't promise an eternal reward and afterlife to people who kill the non-believers for the cause. You tend to value the life of your fellow man a hell of a lot more.

hardinparamedic:stryed: I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

Agnostic Atheism is a thing, you know.

So is Gnostic Atheism.

I can just imagine futurist wars between the two!"People are wonderful. I love individuals. I hate groups of people. I hate a group of people with a 'common purpose'. 'Cause pretty soon they have little hats. And armbands. And fight songs. And a list of people they're going to visit at 3am. So, I dislike and despise groups of people but I love individuals. Every person you look at; you can see the universe in their eyes, if you're really looking."-George Carlin

stryed:gimmegimme: stryed: I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

[3.bp.blogspot.com image 350x285]What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Are you on the search for the Loch Ness Monster? Do you treat your illnesses solely with pyramid power? Are you scared you'll end up falling into space when you're on an airplane? If not, why don't you have the courage to juggle hypotheses and have an open mind?

By being dismissive of everything without absolute proof, your world becomes narrow and only constituted of certainty, and you close yourself to the cloud of possibilities.

There's your mistake. I don't dismiss "everything." I dismiss "everything for which there is no evidence or no compelling argument."

Can I borrow one of the unicorn horns in your collection? I need to make a love potion.

I've honestly never met a person who identified as "religious" who did not see the world through the lens of their religion. In the Christian example - the one we often see cited - their god is thanked for all good, through his omnipotence (and by the way - he must be really relieved he no longer has to worry about fixing games for that Tebow dude)... but they never seem to hold their god accountable for the bad stuff that, if he's all-powerful, he either created or allowed. Why? Because God is all good. So, it's a model of ingrained circular reasoning, and something that is, indeed, drilled into believers by many means. That's just one.bub

I'm not sure if anyone's touched on this yet, but I'd like to touch on the boldiness. You say "they" as if ALL believers do that. You'll find that the majority of us (at least the ones I know, and I'm in TEXAS. Grew up in a VERY religious town and didn't believe growing up) understand that bad and good things have to happen. We can't put God into a box and say "these are His behaviors and this is how He should act in each scenario" because God is not finite. His ways are incomprehensible to me, and I've stopped trying to ... I guess... figure out what will happen based on certain factors. Sure, I make educated decisions based on my surroundings, but I know that there will always be something I didn't think of that could happen at any time to steer me back to whatever path was written out for me.

I don't help people because I feel I'm supposed to or I'll go to Hell. I do it because I feel a pull within to do it. Like I'm supposed to be doing it, even if it's dumb and it sucks sometimes. That's how all of the people of faith I know live as well.

I don't know. Early morning Saturday ramblings, but I hope that sheds some light on the difference between your majority of Christians and mine. :)

stryed:I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

I think you'll find that most atheists define themselves as not being able to disprove the existence of a god or gods, but rather say that the evidence presented makes it highly improbably they exist. In fact much like most religious feel about just about any other god than the one(s) they happen to believe in.I think in that way many atheists actually have been on a long journey down the path you describe as "I don't know, but let's find out". In fact studies show that atheists as a group generally know more about religion and the religious scriptures than those who define themselves as religious. I think this is directly linked to a more inquisitive nature among most atheists compared to most religious.

stryed:I can't believe that, in this day and age, there are still atheists and believers.It takes a lot more courage to say "I don't know, but let's find out", and to constantly juggle possible hypotheses on existence while we can.

kimmygibblershomework:same here. Now if the atheists set up soup kitchens and help millions eat each year, they will be on a level playing field with the christians they despise so much. i say despise, because look at tfa. Come on liberal elites, you can do it ;)

I don't know if this one serves soup, in in terms of dollars spent on charity, it probably covers about a Midwestern state worth of church charity.

And atheists don't waste a bunch of our charitable donations on trying to get people to believe in fairy tales.

The mechanics of any church are engineered to help out their own, this is how and why they exist. They pool their capital and then direct it to the less fortunate among them. It is a kind and thoughtful system.

They all have criteria on which they base their decisions to help, some are egalitarian, some are less so. Some just pay their pastors extravagantly and build monuments to themselves. Most of them pat themselves on the back. People go to church for all kinds of different reasons.

As a Katrina participant I saved the lives of a handful of people and changed the odds for dozens more. I lost a great deal. I got a new set of tires from the Red Cross, a sack of barbecue from Laney's of Selma, and $40 plus two packs of cigarettes from a guy at a gas station. I was not approached by any church.

So, you're saying that there are religious people who attribute the good things that happen in this world to something other than the positive workings of their belief system? That Christians in particular (since I'm fairly certain that's the overwhelming majority in Oklahoma) don't attribute positive things to "God's Grace"?

Huh. News to me.

Wow. That's a lot of inaccurate broad assumptions you've got going there. Is there some reason you seem so hateful of so many people who have never done you any harm? Sure, some may believe that. I know countless who don't. It's certainly not anything I was taught growing up. You can be prejudiced if you want, but at least get your facts straight.

Not wanting anything to do with religion is not prejudice, if you have the freedom of religion I would like the freedom from religion, me not wanting to hear anything about religion should be a right as well.I respect your right to your beliefs so whats the deal with respecting my beliefs that it has no place in society outside of your church or home.

I don't get why a subset of these same people have groups, charities, people who wrote blogs and books, and are extremely vocal about their disdain for not collecting stamps and then biatch and whine when people point out their non-hobby "hobby".

Though your initial statement was indeed dumb; most blanket statements tend to be. I agree your following attempt to explain your bigoted opinion is even dumber. I'm not even going to waste time explaining why, since you can just read up on the last couple of post.

nekom:Helping out a person who happens to be an atheist? Fantastic.Helping out a person BECAUSE she's an atheist? Well, it's still helping, but it's a pretty dick motivation.

same here. Now if the atheists set up soup kitchens and help millions eat each year, they will be on a level playing field with the christians they despise so much. i say despise, because look at tfa. Come on liberal elites, you can do it ;)

Benevolent Misanthrope:Nabb1: nekom: Helping out a person who happens to be an atheist? Fantastic.Helping out a person BECAUSE she's an atheist? Well, it's still helping, but it's a pretty dick motivation.

Kind of agree. I don't know if that was the intent, but it kind of smacks of some backdoor prejudices.

I donated not because she was an atheist, but because she came out of the closet as an atheist in an area where this could get her ostracized or even harmed. By good, charitable Christian folk. That kind of courage and willingness to tell the truth should be rewarded.

What would you say if someone assumed a group of people would commit crimes just because they were black or Latino? My God (pun intended), you're a hypocrite.

maggoo:INeedAName: So an F5 tornado hits Oklahoma, and some people are getting together to raise money to help one specific person?

I have little care about the reason why you give, but I do care when people are prejudicial about their giving.

Hypocrites.

How many times did you made that comment about members of a cult organizing themselves under the pretext of helping other members of their cult?

Your criticism would be warranted if the check I wrote said Christians Only. Instead we have a group of people who are heaping praise on someone engaging in discrimination, but since it benefits the people we like, it's okay?

letrole:The Billdozer: I don't get why a subset of these same people have groups, charities, people who wrote blogs and books, and are extremely vocal about their disdain for not collecting stamps and then biatch and whine when people point out their non-hobby "hobby".

Atheism is indeed a Religion, just not a very good one. One of the tenets of this religion is that this religion isn't a religion, because religion is for saps.

It reminds me of the motto of the Moderation Party: "Only Radicals need a motto".

The Billdozer:I don't get why a subset of these same people have groups, charities, people who wrote blogs and books, and are extremely vocal about their disdain for not collecting stamps and then biatch and whine when people point out their non-hobby "hobby".

Atheism is indeed a Religion, just not a very good one. One of the tenets of this religion is that this religion isn't a religion, because religion is for saps.

It reminds me of the motto of the Moderation Party: "Only Radicals need a motto".

Lenny_da_Hog:Whether or not that's the case, Jimmy-Joe-Bob's church-goin' friend's sister-in-law is going to be preferred for jobs and advancement over the people who don't network through their churches.

hardinparamedic:Studies have found that people who commit abhorrant crimes are trusted more than Atheists and Secular Humanists in the United States. In reality, discrimination against Atheists in employment and government positions is rampant, even going so far as to being written into State employment laws and even State Constitutions when it comes to holding political office. Many states in the south outright make it illegal for an Atheist or nOn-theist to hold office.

I'm not saying atheists are not discriminated against, or that she won't be. I just don't think it's likely based on a 30 second comment made in the aftermath of a horrific event. People are busy mourning and rebuilding. Now if she's the militant type(which I highly doubt) or is very vocal about it(which I also doubt) then I think her odds of being discriminated against get a lot higher.

I only have anecdotes about myself(agnostic) and the few wiccans, atheists and buddhists in my deeply red state. But in this case that's good enough for me since we know knowing about her, her job, coworkers, etc.. to know.

hardinparamedic:log_jammin: I doubt this lady experiences more than a few whispers between coworkers about "did you hear she's an atheist?". and hopefully she won't even experience that until her home is rebuilt and her life is back in order. There is a lot of derp and derpers in red states, but for the most part, the people in them, don't worry themselves of what religion their coworkers are, or aren't.

Studies have found that people who commit abhorrant crimes are trusted more than Atheists and Secular Humanists in the United States. In reality, discrimination against Atheists in employment and government positions is rampant, even going so far as to being written into State employment laws and even State Constitutions when it comes to holding political office. Many states in the south outright make it illegal for an Atheist or nOn-theist to hold office.

When will people realize that most of what takes place in the south isn't Christianity? It's hate speech hidden behind 'religious' values that no educated Christian would ever condone.

And while I know I dont get to disown these people from my religion, I fully believe they would find any vehicle they could to continue teaching their close minded prejudices to their crotch fruit.

I've always felt that, if there is a deity, he, she or it thinks of atheists as those quiet neighbours who keep to themselves, keep their place looking decent, don't throw noisy parties, don't come calling every other day to borrow stuff, and don't mow their lawns at 7 am on a weekend or listen to Black Sabbath at 2 am on a weeknight, unless it's with headphones. You may not be on a first-name basis with them but you'd move heaven and earth to keep them from moving out.

log_jammin:Lenny_da_Hog: Yeah. Nobody networks through their churches for employment or advancement.

Nobody? the idea that "nobody" networks through their churches for employment or advancement is absurd.

But since less than 20% of Americans attend church on a regular basis, and that combined with the numerous flavors and sects of Christianity in the US, I think it's fair to assume that the vast majority don't.

so again. "I doubt it."

You missed the sarcasm font. You're also wrong, according to Pew. The national average of weekly attendance is 39%.

Oklahoma is the 7th most religious state in the US -- there, half the population attends *weekly*. Another 25% attend regularly, at least a few times a year. (No direct link to the map, but you can find it in a few clicks from here)

Captain Dan:Lenny_da_Hog: I don't know if you ever noticed this or not, but there are a lot of people who call themselves Christians that don't have anything to do with what you're talking about.

Yes, they're called bad people.

They're also called "missionaries." Supernaturalists have a long history of seeking out people in emotional trauma to convert them while they're in an irrational state.

But again, this isn't a charity. It's not a big organization that's collecting money and passing it out to various people based on a belief structure. It's people donating to an individual like themselves, just like any church might do for one of their own. Who knows, she might spread some of that around to other people, you don't know.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who will be getting help from their local churches just because they're members of their local churches. Some little Baptist church right now likely has an collection for Sister Eunice and her brood.

Benevolent Misanthrope:So, you're saying that there are religious people who attribute the good things that happen in this world to something other than the positive workings of their belief system? That Christians in particular (since I'm fairly certain that's the overwhelming majority in Oklahoma) don't attribute positive things to "God's Graces.

Nabb1:Benevolent Misanthrope: Nabb1: the fact that you spew hatred and vile and misinformation regarding people who do not share your worldview with the narrow-minded evangelicals I encountered growing up in parts of South Carolina. You're really not that much different when it comes down to your basic disdain for most of humanity.

Wow. Okay...

I'll just bow out here. You're not making sense and it's obvious you're upset.

I will say this: I don't disdain humanity. I disdain people who take advantage of other people and who indoctrinate them to be taken advantage of. And I disdain people who refuse to think.

On second thought, with that last one, perhaps I do disdain most humans. Hmm.

Sure, people who don't see the world the way you do just refuse to think. No, you're not prejudiced at all.

Oh, for Fark's sake. That was a joke about humanity in general. Poor, poor, persecuted Nabb1. What happened to you? You used to be so cool.

Benevolent Misanthrope:Nabb1: the fact that you spew hatred and vile and misinformation regarding people who do not share your worldview with the narrow-minded evangelicals I encountered growing up in parts of South Carolina. You're really not that much different when it comes down to your basic disdain for most of humanity.

Wow. Okay...

I'll just bow out here. You're not making sense and it's obvious you're upset.

I will say this: I don't disdain humanity. I disdain people who take advantage of other people and who indoctrinate them to be taken advantage of. And I disdain people who refuse to think.

On second thought, with that last one, perhaps I do disdain most humans. Hmm.

Sure, people who don't see the world the way you do just refuse to think. No, you're not prejudiced at all.

So, you're saying that there are religious people who attribute the good things that happen in this world to something other than the positive workings of their belief system? That Christians in particular (since I'm fairly certain that's the overwhelming majority in Oklahoma) don't attribute positive things to "God's Grace"?

Huh. News to me.

Wow. That's a lot of inaccurate broad assumptions you've got going there. Is there some reason you seem so hateful of so many people who have never done you any harm? Sure, some may believe that. I know countless who don't. It's certainly not anything I was taught growing up. You can be prejudiced if you want, but at least get your facts straight.

I've heard things like this as well as "People would have no morality if it wasn't for religion" arguments from religious people way more times than I can count. I have a very tolerant non fundamentalist Christian friend ask me once how I would instil morals in my children without religion. She wasn't trying to be mean about it, just asking because we were talking about religion/atheism. She's one of the nice ones.

Dinki:Nabb1: So, you're doing it not for it's own sake, but to make a point to other people and knock down a straw man you've set up. That's nice.

Straw man? I can't begin to count the thousands of times I've been told about 'Christian charity' as if there were no other kind. The religionists have made an industry out of showing everyone how charitable they are, and how that charity must flow from their religion.